Wikipedia:Requests for feedback/2011 May 6

< 2011 May 5

2011 May 6

2011 May 7 >

Back to main feedback page

Index of all pages

WM_Hunt

Looking for a review!

Romkeh (talk) 00:05, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Does he have a full name available? Other than that:

If you have any more newspaper articles that you can link to, and not mainly museum and organization sites, notability will be easy to establish. The current newspaper article is only a passing mention, which is not considered enough for notability.
More categories would be nice.
You may want to brush up on your piped links. I've fixed one, but there may be others.

Looks like a good start, but you should continue to develop it. Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:39, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Point of view pornography

I have recently merged Hamedori and Gonzo pornography into Point of view pornography, per the discussion. I was wondering if my merger is clean enough. See the diffs here. Warning, the article has a picture. Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:29, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:29, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:Ajl772/AfC/Shame On Me (song)

Relisted from 2011 April 16.

Previous discussion

I've been working on this article for a little bit, and I have been doing lots of Google searches to find information about it.

I'm worried though, that if I move this to mainspace that it might get CSD'd/PROD'd/AFD'd for lack of notability because of a (possible) lack of reliable sources. Are the sources I have provided so far reliable enough? I believe the song is notable, since it is being played on many different radio stations, and is not an "independent record label". Granted, the label company is brand-new, but I am also working on creating that article as well. Please feel free to take a look at that one here). I also plan to make an article for the singer as well.

I do know I need to work on the {{cite web}} references more. – Ajl^talk 23:48, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and I know I also need to add it to categories too. – Ajl^talk 23:52, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm...Katrina doesn't have an article. Is that because she's not notable or just that nobody's bothered? I haven't edited any music-related articles so maybe I'm wrong. Anyway, I've done a quick search on Google and the song doesn't seem to be very notable (once you get past the itunes/youtube/katrina's own website results). Also note that one of your references doesn't seem to work. [1]. The second reference is from her own website. And the third one, from iheartradio, just proves that the song exist. I don't think it's a notability-provider. Anyway, this seems like a non-notable song, it will probably get AfDed. Though, as I said, I have not dealt with many music-related articles before so you might want to wait for an expert to comment. Zlqq2144(Talk Contribs) 14:36, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

They would have a better understanding of that, yes. Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:39, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:Notability (music) you really do need multiple neutral, third-party refs for Notability. This doesn't mean that the song is literally not "notable", it just means that we don't have enough citeable info about the song from anyone not directly involved with it to be able to write a neutral article. Maybe just keep the draft here, move on and write some other articles, and in six months see if there's any news coverage about the song that you can use to establish Notability. MatthewVanitas (talk) 14:49, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

@Zlqq2144: Hmmm, that's odd... it worked when I first retrieved it.

@MatthewVanitas: Ok, thank you for your comments. I will hold off on it for a while.

– Ajl^talk 23:26, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What type of information counts as "third-party"? Do radio station events (i.e. a lounge performance) count as being notable enough? Or if they are not notable by themselves, do a number of them add up to being notable? – Ajl^talk 23:56, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can I get some answers please? – AJL^talk 01:31, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming you want answers to what "third-party source" is, you could consider looking at this essay and this guideline, or just take my definition that a third-party source is one independent of the subject. As for the radio events, if there is a plethora of them then it may be acceptable; I am not sure of the guidelines for that. A few more notes about the article:

You linked to Amazon.com and another sales site. This is generally not allowed under WP:ELNO.
It may not be notable, as shown above. Neither the singer nor her album has an article yet, and a Google search for the album doesn't show many reliable sources, if any.

I hope that answers your questions. Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:20, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alright then. I suppose I should ask over at WikiProject Music what the standard for multiple radio station events are? – AJL^talk 07:15, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they would have a better understanding of the criteria for that subject. Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:41, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Taylor von Kriegenbergh

This is my first article and I am seeking feedback. Thank you.

Dennisjohara (talk) 04:47, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've tagged the article for a few things, but the most important is that the person may not pass the Wikipedia guidelines for notability. To prove that, you need verifiability, as proven with reliable sources. Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:20, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the feedback! I'm just getting started with Wikipedia, and I read all of the guidelines for posting articles before I posted this one. I searched for articles on other professional poker players, and some have not yet achieved the level of success as this young man yet their articles have been up for a long period of time. That is why I thought that he would pass the notability test. Also, can you go into more detail as to why the sources I've cited are not verifiable or reliable? Rereading the guidlines, the sources seem to pass both tests. I'm not trying to challenge your feedback; I'm just trying to understand so that I can make the article acceptable and avoid these errors in the future. Thank you!

I'm not sure if World Poker Tour and Go River Hawks are considered reliable sources, or if that has even been discussed. Your link to ESPN may be even better as a source, so try linking to that instead. Naturally, there are editors who look for sources that they trust personally; I guess I committed that. BTW, could you send me a list of those players you've mentioned so that I can check them out? Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:06, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There are many on Wikipedia, here is a partial list: Doug Lee, Andre Boyer, Robert Turner, David Warba, David Baxter, David Bach, Andrew Black, Ralph Perry. Some of these gentlemen have won more money or more tournaments than Taylor von Kriegenbergh, but none have done nor will do what he has done. It is extremely rare for someone to win more than $1 million in his or her very first World Poker Tour tournament, in fact I do not believe that it has been done before. I have not verified that with a reliable source, so that is why it is not yet included in the article. Please let me know your thoughts after you browse some of these players' articles, and thank you for all of your help!

Cass Business School

Hello, I'm trying to improve the page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cass_Business_School in response to constructive feedback we've had. I'm a total novice and I'm finding it quite challenging. I've posted a possible revision on the dicussion section of the page (which will obviously need citations added) and would love feedback!

Bensawtell (talk) 13:40, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Surfline

I've moved this page from my userspace to live. This is my first brand new article, if anyone has suggestions or feedback I'd love to hear it. If someone could review it and remove the "new unreviewed article" status (assuming it's up to snuff) I'd really appreciate it. Thanks!

76.175.169.127 (talk) 14:38, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good layout, really nice work providing non-primary sourcing. I can't tell you how many biz articles think it's sufficient to just quote their company website; you've nailed it by focusing on reputable news coverage. I made some very minor tweaks, but the main thing you need to do is fix your WP:Citations to a clearer format. The issue is that the titles of the articles aren't shown in your footnotes. Check the Citations format, and include the titles, with the URl hotlinked to the title itself, like [www.acmenews.com ''New 2008 Anvils Announced''] which appears as [www.acmenews.com New 2008 Anvils Announced] with a nice clickable hyperlink. That aside, I'd add an appropriate Wikiproject(s) to the Talk page, add a company logo (uploadable under WP:Fair use). And if you can get in communication with the company, maybe see if they'll release one good screenshot of their forecasts to WP:Creative Commons; if you do that you'll just need them to fill out a WP:OTRS tag from an official company email to document that the company did indeed release one screenshot for use. Nice work, feel free to write me with any questions. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:10, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:Smithriedel/Computer_Icons

I have expanded an existing article, Computer Icons. Would like some editing help and guidance in adding it to the topic. This is my first article submitted to wikipedia, so I am unfamiliar with your process.

thank you

Smithriedel (talk) 17:00, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Waldini

I would appreciate feedback on this article and, if someone feels it has the right style and references, perhaps they would remove the "New Unreviewed Article" box. Thanks

Skrbishop (talk) 17:14, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done The main things you need to do: footnotes #1 and #6 need to be written out as full citations, add the category for "X year births", add some WikiProjects to the Talk page, and move all your footnote tags after the punctuation marks (with no space between). That aside, looks great! MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:14, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

EN_15838

Hi. I would very much appreciate it if anyone could please take the time to review my 'new unreviewed article'. It should contain reliable sources.

Thank you in advance!

Emba7 EilertE (talk) 17:18, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, I'm not seeing sources or footnotes, just external links. Where is this info coming from? MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:18, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:Gaebler/Acquity Group

I created this article first as a userspace draft, so if anyone has any thoughts about how this article can be improved, I would appreciate it! Thanks!

Gaebler (talk) 20:49, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:Da24mk/Mehran Khan

Please refer to all the links provided to check all the validity of the article provided.

Da24mk (talk) 22:02, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, the article is not yet ready to go. The problem is that all your sourcing is WP:Primary sources, that is, basically the artist describing himself. Refer to WP:Notability (film) and note that you need to provide independent, reliable, substantive coverage of the subject. That would include things like newspaper articles about him and his works, but citing Facebook is not at all convincing since anyone can make up a Facebook page about anything, so it has no authority. I encourage you to also post this same Request for Feedback at WP:WikiProject Film to get advice from the experts there. MatthewVanitas (talk) 02:24, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:Darkwingduck123/Til Jihad Do Us Part

Please can you give me feedback to the article I have linked? I am new to Wikipedia and am still in the process of learning how it all works!

Thanks in advance :)

Darkwingduck123 (talk) 22:35, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting page, and a film I'll have to check out. At this point, you mainly have some sourcing issues. Not to dump reading on you, but I'd advise you read through WP:Notability (film); not that I think this film doesn't meet the standards, but for you to better understand how to document its notability. I'd also suggest you post this same request at the Discussion page of WP:WikiProject Film.

At this point, you lack categories, and you have no footnotes. You have three sort-of footnotes, but they're not footnoted to anything, they're just hanging out right before the citations themselves. Read WP:Footnotes and note that footnotes are meant to prove that individual sections/sentences are true. For example, where did you get the info for the "Music" section from? Wherever it is, put that info in a footnote at the end of the music section. You have several good items in your External Links, the Independent article, reviews, etc. that should probably be footnoted to individual sections to verify that the info you posted is accurate. Read the policies I linked, post this same request at WikiProject Film, and I think you'll be able to cruise smoothly into a very well-polished and well-documented article. MatthewVanitas (talk) 01:10, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:Amadavida/TreeRing Yearbooks

Hi there - I've submitted this article and would like feedback to get it ready to go live. Thank you.

Amadavida (talk) 23:55, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've taken a look at the article, but because my internet connection is slow I cannot check out the external links. Here are a few things to remember:

You should try and find more specific categories.
You should remember to wikilink specific terms. For example, [[example]] produces example.
You should remember that Youtube is generally not allowed as an external link, both for copyright reasons and for reliability.
Sentences like "They have been highlighted by a variety of news outlets including Fast Company, NBC, Fox, ABC, CBS, and the New York Times as an innovator in the yearbook space." should have multiple references, one to a story by each of the networks. This is to help prove notability per the General Notability Guidelines.

I hope that helps. Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:16, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]